St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-04-08
THE HADDoCK MuRDER.
More Witnesses for the Defense.
ArensdOrf Tes:ifies in His own
Behalf.

Wore Witnesses for the Defense.
ArensdOrf Tes:ifies in His own
Behalf.
Sioux CITY, Ia, April John Fitz-
simmons. who testified for the state last
week that the man he saw shoot Haddock
ran in the direction of the bridge, again
appeared on the stand this morning and
swore for the defense that he was formerly
mistaken concerning that point. He now
thinks the man who did the shooting ran
in northerly direction. He did not be-
lieve the assassin was John Arensdorf. W.
U, Morrill,, business man, testified that
Bismarck's reputation was bad. Harry
Sherwin, another of the defendants, took
the stand.
He recollected the evening of Aug. per-
fectly well. Saw Leavitt going into dry
goods store with a light suit of clothes on
l was at the English Kitchen saloon, of
which l was proprietor. at the time Of the
killing. 1 heard of the killing of Haddock at
about 1880. / heard of 1t at my place of
business. EArensdorf was at the Kitchen
about the time 1 heard of the killing of Had
dock. He had been there about seven or
eight minutes, / couldn't say exactly how
long. He wore dark suit of clothes. I
went down Fourth street with John Arens-
dorf. left Arensdorf about ii o'clock and
he went west. 1 knew of no conspiracy to
lnjure Haddock. l wasn't at any meeting of
saloonkeepers where anything was said about
whipping or iniuring Haddock or any other
person. l cannot state who were the officers
of the SaloonkeeperS' assoc iation and can
not say who presided.
ARENsDoRF's TESTIMONY.
This afternoon John Arensdorf, the de-
fendant, took the stand and testified SUBJ
Stantlally as follows:
How in fLal
two years, and during the month of August,
1856, was foreman for Franz Brothers.. On
Aug. 3 l came down town between and s
O'Clock in the evening; stayed at Philip Eb-
cries place till $3.50; met Barnes and Day-
elaar and went with the former TO Shepherds,
across the street. 1t was after 10 when we
left there. Barnes went west and went to
the Chicago saloon and then 10 Junk's saloon
Scollard and Grady were there when ar
rived. Went next to the English Kitchen
and heard there that a man was killed. Went
to the place of murder, remained few min
utes, then went to the brewery; returned to
Junk's, where / remained ten or fifteen min
utes; then went home. Wore my usual
clothing, blue suit and tail coat. Did not
have on rubber coat. Have heard the tes-
timony of Leavitt Was not at the corner of
Fourth and Water streets when Haddock was
killed Was at the meeting on the I'd of Au-
gust. Was not at private meeting to my
knowledge. Nothing was said in my presence
about doing up any one.
The witness then made detailed denial
of the movements and language attributed
to him in the testimony of Leavitt. He had
conversed with Leavitt at the Iatter's thea
ter. but had not discussed the killing of
'Haddock. Witness knew Bismarck and
wife, but denied the truth of an important
part OF their testimony relating to him.
He knew of no conspiracy to injure any one
and had no idea where Haddock was that
night Cross examined by the state, the
witness testimony was characterized by
sweeping denials of all damaging testimony
relating to him given by other witnesses.
He saw Treiber at Junk's OH the night of
the murder, but did not remember seeing
Munchesrath. Did not see Henry Peters at
Junk's. Saw him several weeks after the
murder, but knew nothing about where he
went. Denied receiving any letters from
Treiber. Had talked with Mrs. Treiber
about her husband. but had written the
latterno letter. The witness met Mrs.
Bismarck; on the business matter referred
to III her testimony, but had never told the
sheriff or any other officer that the wife of
the suspected man had gone away. He did
not think it any of his business. He did
not know what he testified to before the
corOners jury, and thought his recollection
then was not as good as it was now. These
last replies were to questions implying that
the witness testimony before the corOner's
jury was different from that given in court